BORN FROM FIRE (Model Nina)

AnhTuNguyen · Jan 28, 2014

More photos are coming :mrgreen:

WEBSITE: https://www.anhtunguyen.com/
FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/AnhTuNguyen.Photography
Blog: Anh Tu Nguyen Photography | Fine Art, Fashion & Portrait Photographer. Cinema Admirer. Day Dreamer. Night Wanderer.
FlickR : Flickr: Anh Tu Nguyen Photography's Photostream
--------------------------------------------------------

Model: Nina Müller
Photographer: Anh Tu Nguyen Photography
Hair & MUA: Brigitte Schmitz
Stylist: Thu Thuy
Dress: Frank Rommerskirchen
Assistants: Franz Josef Heinen, Fred Müller

#1

BORN FROM FIRE by Anh Tu Nguyen Photography, on Flickr

#3

A Dirge of Sorrow by Anh Tu Nguyen Photography, on Flickr

#4

AMARANTH by Anh Tu Nguyen Photography, on Flickr

Zyr55 · Jan 28, 2014

Nice! I'm a sucker for this type of edit.

Braineack · Jan 28, 2014

My take:

This is not photography.

It's too squarely cropped.

The model's pose is odd

The digital extension/manipulation of the train is very obvious and makes her look like she has 15' legs. It's also taking up a lot of the frame so it's taking dominance in the scene, and drawing away from the very tiny tiny tiny blurred face of the model.

Her bouquet is very obviously manipulated as well (looks like you use this same flower often).

And I'm also guessing that this shot wasn't taken in the setting of the bg? It was a poorly chosen BG to drop a bride into, there's not relation between the two -- you'd never see a bride in a $10K dress stand in swampy water like that. Plus the perspective is off.

IMHO, this is probably the weakest image on your Flickr photostream and I'd scrap it or completely rework it. You have much stronger work you should share with the blatant amateurish photoshop errors like on this image (e.g., clone brush, blur brush, drop shadows).

Honestly, you have some AMAZING work on your photostream, I feel like this was a half-hearted attempt to copy the current cliche of digital art we are seeing a LOT of going viral lately. Please don't jump off a cliff.

gsgary · Jan 28, 2014

Braineack said:
My take:

This is not photography.

It's too squarely cropped.

The model's pose is odd

The digital extension/manipulation of the train is very obvious and makes her look like she has 15' legs. It's also taking up a lot of the frame so it's taking dominance in the scene, and drawing away from the very tiny tiny tiny blurred face of the model.

Her bouquet is very obviously manipulated as well (looks like you use this same flower often).

And I'm also guessing that this shot wasn't taken in the setting of the bg? It was a poorly chosen BG to drop a bride into, there's not relation between the two -- you'd never see a bride in a $10K dress stand in swampy water like that. Plus the perspective is off.

IMHO, this is probably the weakest image on your Flickr photostream and I'd scrap it or completely rework it. You have much stronger work you should share with the blatant amateurish photoshop errors like on this image (e.g., clone brush, blur brush, drop shadows).

Honestly, you have some AMAZING work on your photostream, I feel like this was a half-hearted attempt to copy the current cliche of digital art we are seeing a LOT of going viral lately. Please don't jump off a cliff.

What if it was shot with a 6X6 camera

Braineack · Jan 28, 2014

Why would that matter? The crop still doesn't do the composition justice. Pic is 2000x1900 btw, if that matters or not.

Derrel · Jan 28, 2014

You have some great stuff on your Flickr pages!

AnhTuNguyen · Jan 28, 2014

Braineack said:
My take:

This is not photography.

It's too squarely cropped.

The model's pose is odd

The digital extension/manipulation of the train is very obvious and makes her look like she has 15' legs. It's also taking up a lot of the frame so it's taking dominance in the scene, and drawing away from the very tiny tiny tiny blurred face of the model.

Her bouquet is very obviously manipulated as well (looks like you use this same flower often).

And I'm also guessing that this shot wasn't taken in the setting of the bg? It was a poorly chosen BG to drop a bride into, there's not relation between the two -- you'd never see a bride in a $10K dress stand in swampy water like that. Plus the perspective is off.

IMHO, this is probably the weakest image on your Flickr photostream and I'd scrap it or completely rework it. You have much stronger work you should share with the blatant amateurish photoshop errors like on this image (e.g., clone brush, blur brush, drop shadows).

Honestly, you have some AMAZING work on your photostream, I feel like this was a half-hearted attempt to copy the current cliche of digital art we are seeing a LOT of going viral lately. Please don't jump off a cliff.

Hey i appreciate your advices

But everything are real, the bouquet, the dress, the location where the model stood. The dress was 2 meter long and i just did some minor changes with photoshop.

Braineack · Jan 28, 2014

I'm sticking with you have much much better work on your Flickr -- work without: out of focus models, floating branches, obvious digital blur, fake drop shadows, and repeating shapes from cloning. Your perfume of withered roses series is excellent; all boobies aside. And your straight photography is that much stronger.

Derrel · Jan 28, 2014

I get the distinct sense that this shot of Nina is one of the most-recent shots you've worked on, and that you're pretty excited about it and think it is far better than it is due to the phenomenon known as "recency". I don't want to appear to be ganging up on you, or unfairly knocking your work, but this,specific photo is not that good. Period. It looks off-kilter, and haphazard in a number of ways that I'm not going to enumerate, because the list is about 10 items long. I guarantee you; come back to this shot in six months, and you'll see that you have some fine, fine photos on your Flickr pages, but this specific shot is NOT among even your top 20 shots. I understand that you might be emotionally attached to this, but as viewers, we do not CARE how much work and effort and sweat you had to put into a shot. All we, as non-involved third parties, care about is that which we SEE. In front of us.

AnhTuNguyen · Jan 29, 2014

Ok thank you guys for the feedbacks! I am considering a re-retouch.
But i just want to clarify that the digital manipulation was not that much. The dress, the branches, the flower are pretty much the way they are.

Braineack · Jan 29, 2014

AnhTuNguyen said:
Ok thank you guys for the feedbacks! I am considering a re-retouch.
But i just want to clarify that the digital manipulation was not that much. The dress, the branches, the flower are pretty much the way they are.

It was enough.

You're a skilled photographer -- your Flickr speaks for itself -- but this is the weakest showing; the photograhpy in it is not that great and the PS work is amateurish at best.

AnhTuNguyen · Feb 7, 2014

Braineack said:
AnhTuNguyen said:

Ok thank you guys for the feedbacks! I am considering a re-retouch.
But i just want to clarify that the digital manipulation was not that much. The dress, the branches, the flower are pretty much the way they are.

Click to expand...

It was enough.

View attachment 65531

You're a skilled photographer -- your Flickr speaks for itself -- but this is the weakest showing; the photograhpy in it is not that great and the PS work is amateurish at best.

Thank you Braineack! i have just re-retouched the first photograph. What do you think?

Bossy · Feb 7, 2014

I just want to second everything Braineak has said.

This pose is terrible. Like, not salvageable terrible. It looks like she's sniffing poop. And she is absolutely orange.
She looks modge podged into the background, its completely lacking in interaction.